Justin.TV found not guilty in case filed by Zuffa for streaming

Communications Act. Zuffa's claims relate to the "stealing cable" provisions. Justin.tv claimed that 47 USC 230 applies, a pretty logical argument given that Zuffa is bringing a non-IP claim against Justin.tv for third party content. However, the court sidesteps the Section 230 issue, saying it's never been applied to the Communications Act (true) and that the court couldn't find any analogous "stealing cable" claim against websites, and it didn't want to touch this "novel" issue.

Instead, the court dismisses the "stealing cable" claim on its elements. The court says:

In essence, Zuffa alleges that Justin.tv’s users copied Zuffa’s UFC event and then rebroadcast the UFC event over the internet. This is not the type of conduct properly addressed by the Communications Act, but by copyright law (and, potentially, trademark law) because Justin.tv had no relationship with the original cable or satellite signal: by the allegations, Justin.tv did not receive or intercept any actual cable or satellite signal or broadcast. The Court finds no evidence in the statutory language, other cases, or legislative history that the Communications Act addresses this type of conduct or was meant to bolster or act as a separate type of copyright claim.

SUCK IT ZUFFA!!!! (that is meant in humor) keep on sticking it to the big man

KungFuMaster

3/21/12 12:19:58PM

Let's start a chant!

Hip, Hip, Hooray!

george112

3/21/12 12:43:35PM

Nice to hear.

I always knew they would be found not guilty.

Internet is a very broad area for laws to try and control. Just isn't going to happen

scoozna

3/21/12 1:12:47PM

I followed the links to the blog where it was originally posted. They end with this:

"At its core, the lawsuit is about copyright infringement, and Justin.tv didn't attempt to dismiss that claim. So the case hasn't gotten to the real meaty claim yet. It's my (presumably biased) position that Justin.tv should clearly qualify for the 512(c) safe harbor. "

I have no idea what the "512(c) safe harbor" is. Anyone?

There has to be some sort of copyright violation here somewhere. I could understand Justin.tv not being liable as long as they don't know about the streaming of the event. If Zuffa were to point them to an illegal stream as it's happening, are they not legally responsible for ending it ? (and didn't they start doing that on their own anyway?)

FlashyG

3/21/12 1:39:44PM

Section 512(c) applies to OSPs that store infringing material. In addition to the two general requirements that OSPs comply with standard technical measures and remove repeat infringers, § 512(c) also requires that the OSP: 1) not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity, 2) not be aware of the presence of infringing material or know any facts or circumstances that would make infringing material apparent, and 3) upon receiving notice from copyright owners or their agents, act expeditiously to remove the purported infringing material.

As long as Justin.tv followed those rules, they are safe from prosecution.

airkerma

3/21/12 1:49:00PM

Good thing there's no SOPA or PIPA

Bubbles

3/21/12 1:58:34PM

Justin.tv has shut down a lot of these illegal streams. Whether I was watching a UFC event or the new episode of The Office (since I didn't have cable for a while) or other shows, streams would be shut down mid show.

mrsmiley

3/21/12 3:07:13PM

I'm not law savy so maybe someone can help me here. I'm desperate to understand this.

Dana once said UFC fans cluster. That is one guy orders the event and then 5 or 6 others come to this guys house and they watch the event together.Now what is the difference between that and sharing it with a few friends over the internet?

Admititly, the friend base is a lot wider,lol.

Let's put it this way. If I broadcasted a PPV over a private stream could you be prosecuted?

godofdixie

3/21/12 4:41:07PM

the internet can't be stopped

Cooler

3/21/12 5:04:36PM

They havn't streamed PPV's [i]directly[/i] on their site since 2008-ish

scoozna

3/22/12 3:59:35PM

Posted by mrsmiley

I'm not law savy so maybe someone can help me here. I'm desperate to understand this.

Dana once said UFC fans cluster. That is one guy orders the event and then 5 or 6 others come to this guys house and they watch the event together.Now what is the difference between that and sharing it with a few friends over the internet?

Admititly, the friend base is a lot wider,lol.

Let's put it this way. If I broadcasted a PPV over a private stream could you be prosecuted?

I'm not a lawyer either, but I would imagine that buying the PPV and showing it to your friends on one TV is not prosecutable but broadcasting it over the internet to the same number of people is...the idea being that they were not there watching your (legal) PPV buy so they were watching a copy of it that Zuffa otherwise would have been paid for.

mrsmiley

3/22/12 4:20:53PM

Posted by scoozna

Posted by mrsmiley

I'm not law savy so maybe someone can help me here. I'm desperate to understand this.

Dana once said UFC fans cluster. That is one guy orders the event and then 5 or 6 others come to this guys house and they watch the event together.Now what is the difference between that and sharing it with a few friends over the internet?

Admititly, the friend base is a lot wider,lol.

Let's put it this way. If I broadcasted a PPV over a private stream could you be prosecuted?

I'm not a lawyer either, but I would imagine that buying the PPV and showing it to your friends on one TV is not prosecutable but broadcasting it over the internet to the same number of people is...the idea being that they were not there watching your (legal) PPV buy so they were watching a copy of it that Zuffa otherwise would have been paid for.

Gotta spread the love.Thanks

Boo_Radley21

3/22/12 4:56:10PM

Keep on trying metallica..

i mean zuffa

Aether

3/22/12 6:49:29PM

Can we get a tally on how many millions of dollars zuffa throws into the toilet with this useless campaign? Downloading is part of our culture now, it's not going away, everyone is about 15 years too late to stop this trend.